green
Positive treatment
Issue: facially sufficient claimFL ↗
Issue: pleading requirements ruleFL ↗
Issue: obligation testFL ↗
Issue: sentence ruleFL ↗
Quoted verbatim 1×
16.2 score
“the allegations required by mancino at a minimum would have to address how and where the record demonstrates entitlement to relief.”
Treatment trajectory · 1998 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1998
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 47 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Chappell v. State
the allegations required by mancino at a minimum would have to address how and where the record demonstrates entitlement to relief.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Santiago v. State
Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167, 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Stapler v. State
Baker v. State, 714 So. 2d 1167, 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (holding that, in accordance with the supreme court's decision in State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 1998), a rule 3.800(a) motion "must affirmatively allege that `the court records demonstrate on their face an entitlement to relief,'" and indicating that "[t]he allegations required by Mancino at a minimum would have to address how and where the record demonstrates an entitlement to relief").
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Petscher v. State
Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167, 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Chitty v. State
However, the appellant has stated a facially sufficient claim pursuant to rule 3.800(a) and his record attachments satisfy the requirements of Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167, 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Nelson v. State
See Toro v. State, 719 So.2d 947, 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167, n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Bradley v. State
Affirmed without prejudice to file a rule 3.800(a) motion that complies with the pleading requirements of State v. Mancino, 714 So.2d 429, 433 (Fla.1998) (3.800 motion must affirmatively allege that the court records demonstrate on their face entitlement to relief), and Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (allegations required by Mancino at a minimum must address how and where the record demonstrates an entitlement to relief).
discussed
Cited "see"
Anderson v. State
See Whitfield v. State, 864 So.2d 562, 562 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (“[A] facially sufficient rule 3.800 motion to correct an illegal sentence must allege where and how the court records demonstrate entitlement to relief.” (citing Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998))).
discussed
Cited "see"
Walker v. State
See Stapler v. State, 939 So.2d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (explaining that, at a minimum, a rule 3.800(a) motion must "address how and where the record demonstrates an entitlement to relief") (quoting Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167, 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Nieves v. State
See Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 , 1167 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)(explaining that “[t]he allegations required by [State v.] Mancino [, 714 So.2d 429 (Fla.1998),] at a minimum would have to address how and where the record demonstrates an entitlement to relief’).
cited
Cited "see"
Reynolds v. State
See Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Hummel v. State, 782 So.2d 450 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).
discussed
Cited "see"
Pace v. State
See Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 , 1167 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (explaining that “[t]he allegations required by State v. Mancino, 714 So.2d 429 (Fla.1998) at a minimum would have to address how and where the record demonstrates entitlement to relief.”).
discussed
Cited "see"
Phipps v. State
See Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)(in order to raise illegal sentence claim under rule 3.800(a), appellant must affirmatively allege where and how the record demonstrates an entitlement to relief).
cited
Cited "see"
Wallace v. State
See Toro v. State, 719 So.2d 947, 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (adopting strict pleading requirement imposed by Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Hartage v. State
See Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 , 1167 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (explaining that “[t]he allegations required by [State v.] Mancino[, 714 So.2d 429 (Fla.1988)] at a minimum would have to address how and where the record demonstrates entitlement to relief.”).
discussed
Cited "see"
Colantuoni v. State
See Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)(setting forth pleading requirements of State v. Mancino, 714 So.2d 429 (Fla.1998)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Dyess v. State
See Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 , 1167 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (“more than mere conclusory allegations” must identify court records showing entitlement to relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800).
cited
Cited "see"
Fennell v. State
See Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998), citing State v. Mancino, 714 So.2d 429, 433 (Fla.1998).
cited
Cited "see"
Moran v. State
See Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Lomont v. State, 506 So.2d 1141 (Fla.2d DCA 1987).
cited
Cited "see"
Granville v. State
See Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Whitney v. State, 493 So.2d 1077 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).
cited
Cited "see"
Donald v. State
See Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Campbell v. State, 718 So.2d 886 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).
discussed
Cited "see"
McQuiter v. State
See Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (setting forth pleading requirements of State v. Mancino, 714 So.2d 429 (Fla.1998)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Jones v. State
See Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (setting forth pleading requirements of State v. Mancino, 714 So.2d 429 (Fla.1998)).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Burchfield v. State
See Whitfield v. State, 864 So.2d 562 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (affirming a trial court's order denying a rule 3.800(a) motion claiming additional jail credit, even though the dates supplied by the State in its response to the motion were insufficient as a matter of law to support the denial of relief, because the motion failed to specifically allege where and how the trial court's records in the case would demonstrate an entitlement to relief); see also Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (holding that, in accordance with the supreme court's decision in State v. Mancino, 714 So.2d 4…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Hutchins v. State
See also Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Garcia v. State
See State v. Mancino, 714 So.2d 429 (Fla.1998) (holding that credit time issues are cognizable in a rule 3.800 motion when it is affirmatively alleged that the court records demonstrate on their face an entitlement to relief); see also Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998) (holding that the allegations required by Mancino would have to address at a minimum how and where the record demonstrated an entitlement to relief).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Perry BAKER, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
97-02383.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Jul 27, 1998.
Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and P. Douglas Brinkmeyer, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Sonya R. Horbelt, Assistant Attorney General, and Trina Kramer, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
The appellant challenges an order by which his sworn motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), was denied.
In order to raise an illegal sentencing claim pursuant to rule 3.800(a), there are a number of requirements:
1. The error must have resulted in an illegal sentence. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(a)(1998); State v. Mancino, 714 So.2d 429, 432-433 (Fla. June 11, 1998); Hopping v. State, 708 So.2d 263, 265 (Fla.1998).
2. The error must appear on the face of the record. See State v. Callaway, 658 So.2d 983, 988 (Fla.1995).
3. The motion must affirmatively allege that "the court records demonstrate on their face an entitlement to relief." Mancino, supra at 433.[1]
Appellant's motion does not allege that the court's records will demonstrate a clear entitlement to relief. We, therefore, affirm.
In light of the fact that Mancino imposes a new pleading requirement, this affirmance is without prejudice to appellant's ability to file a properly pled rule 3.800(a) motion in the trial court.
JOANOS and WOLF, JJ., and SMITH, LARRY G., Senior Judge, concur.
1 We presume that this requirement would necessitate more than mere conclusory allegations. See, e.g., Williams v. State, 595 So.2d 1061 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (affirming denial of 3.850 motion on grounds that motion contained only conclusory allegations in support of claims for relief). The allegations required by Mancino at a minimum would have to address how and where the record demonstrates an entitlement to relief.